Indian Police Manage to Kill Zero Naxals in 3 Months

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/zero-naxal-kill-in-3-months-upsets-home-secretary/articleshow/24722485.cms

March on comrades, march on.

[Comrade Jacob]

It's a good ratio.

[Stalinist Speaker]

yup their new tactics have improved a lot.

[Conscript]

I have a funny feeling if the naxals ever win and cease to be anything but peasant rebels the resulting state will be pretty disappointing.

[Lensky]

I have a funny feeling if the naxals ever win and cease to be anything but peasant rebels the resulting state will be pretty disappointing.

Well I don't, if the Naxals win in India, capitalism is deprived of one of its largest markets and this will either result in a catastrophic crisis or another Vietnam style intervention.

[Durruti's friend]

Well I don't, if the Naxals win in India, capitalism is deprived of one of its largest markets and this will either result in a catastrophic crisis
Why would that necessarily happen? Look what happened in Nepal, or, in the end, in China. Capitalism draped in a red flag. Nothing changed, but somehow the Naxals are going to be different, even though they have the same (or almost same) tactics and rhetoric?


or another Vietnam style intervention.
And why the hell is that good? The Vietnam War didn't change anything in class relations, just made the proletariat suffer for decades and will indirectly suffer for decades more..

[Hrafn]

^ Why does it seem to you that TMPH thinks it would be a good thing?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Wow, that is pathetic by any standard of warfare. I feel that this points to a deeper meaning regarding the contradictions of the Indian state but I am too lazy right now to bother and analyze. In any case it is good news.

[Lensky]

Why would that necessarily happen? Look what happened in Nepal, or, in the end, in China. Capitalism draped in a red flag. Nothing changed, but somehow the Naxals are going to be different, even though they have the same (or almost same) tactics and rhetoric?


What's happened in Nepal? The fight is still ongoing - elections are being boycotted, masses are being mobilized, and the situation is unclear. This sort of defeatism is whats killing the left.

[La Guaneña]

I bet that this shit must be hard to explain in front of the cameras... :grin:

[boiler]

Great stuff, onwards to victory

[Rafiq]

The only thing good out of a naxal victory is a resurfaced topic of communism.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

^ Why does it seem to you that TMPH thinks it would be a good thing?

Because TMPH's post, "Well I don't" + "Another vietnam war!", was in response to a previous post that worried that a win for the nasals would end in disappointment.

[Brotto Rühle]

If the Naxals win they will institute a state capitalist society.

[hashem]

The Vietnam War didn't change anything in class relations, just made the proletariat suffer for decades and will indirectly suffer for decades more.. the Vietnam war changed colonialism and moral of oppressed nations. it showed that a small country - if its lead by a progressive ideology - can defeat strong imperialists. if it wasnt for Vietnam war and struggles similar to it, many countries were still old type colonies.

[Per Levy]

What's happened in Nepal? The fight is still ongoing - elections are being boycotted, masses are being mobilized, and the situation is unclear. This sort of defeatism is whats killing the left.

what happend in nepal? the maoists won and did what every left bourgeois party would do, being the left wing of capital. or to say it in another way, the maoists sold out big time. and tbh, hopefully the left dies as it doesnt offer anything to workers anyway.


the Vietnam war changed colonialism and moral of oppressed nations. it showed that a small country - if its lead by a progressive ideology - can defeat strong imperialists. if it wasnt for Vietnam war and struggles similar to it, many countries were still old type colonies.

and because of this we now have new type colonies and that is a good thing, is that what you're saying?

[Durruti's friend]

What's happened in Nepal? The fight is still ongoing - elections are being boycotted, masses are being mobilized, and the situation is unclear. This sort of defeatism is whats killing the left.
As far as I know, the Maoists are currently banning strikes and are not even trying to install proletarian rule over the country. Prachanda himself said that he and the CPN(M) were only trying to push Nepal into capitalism, not communism. What is that if not class collaborationism?

They had a progressive role as fighters against the remnants of feudalism, but it stops right there. If that's the best thing Maoism as an ideology can offer, then you're having a big problem on your hands.


the Vietnam war changed colonialism and moral of oppressed nations. it showed that a small country - if its lead by a progressive ideology - can defeat strong imperialists. if it wasnt for Vietnam war and struggles similar to it, many countries were still old type colonies.
Nah. North Vietnam was supported by another imperialist power - USSR, just as the South was supported by the USA. And there was no progressive ideology there, just plain nationalism used by the Vietnamese national bourgeoisie to push the proletariat in a fight for their (bourgeois) class interests. The Vietnamese workers didn't achieve anything from the war.

[Alexios]

If a bunch of Naxals were killed you guys would probably be crying for peace.

[Hrafn]

If a bunch of Naxals were killed you guys would probably be crying for peace.

Uh. Naxalites, and other anti-state activists in India, are killed constantly. This three month thing is just a strange exception... and only applies to the rural guerrillas, not other progressive movements. I don't see anyone crying.

[hashem]

Nah. North Vietnam was supported by another imperialist power - USSR, just as the South was supported by the USA. And there was no progressive ideology there, just plain nationalism used by the Vietnamese national bourgeoisie to push the proletariat in a fight for their (bourgeois) class interests. The Vietnamese workers didn't achieve anything from the war. being supported by an imperialist power isnt always a bad thing. revolutionaries have used conflicts between imperialist powers to achieve victory. Napoleon III was leader of a reactionary regime but when he invaded Austrian forces in Italy, Marx stated that this can be used by Italian revolutionaries for progressive aims. Lenin clearly stated that if USSR becomes under attack from one imperialist camp, it will immediately join the other camp and thus made both camps think twice before attacking USSR. the ideology which lead Vietnamese people in their struggle was progressive, although it suffered diversions from scientific socialism. even bourgeois democratic nationalism was a step forward in the backward colony of Indochina as long as it was able to defeat colonialism. do you even know what conditions did Vietnamese people (including workers) lived in when it was a colony? they were treated like slaves. now, even after Vietnam is corrupted by revisionism, they have much more rights and much better living conditions.